“A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college”. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the po

Nowadays more and more people have access to a complete educational path, thanks to the development of governmental policies and an increasing interest in having an educated population. Public schools allow also those in disadvantageous economic conditions to receive and pursue an education and universities as well are no more reserved to those with a family tradition or particularly wealthy. However, what should students actually study during the school years preceding college? Should they all follow the same curriculum or should they have the opportunity to pursue diversified curricula?

Personally, I do not completely agree with the presented prompt, even though it should be more accurately examined in order to sort out all the nuances it implicates. I do not think students should all receive exactly the same kind of education, or at least that this should not be happening in high school. In fact, while it is important that in primary and comprehensive school (I am referring to the Italian education system, which is the one I know best) all students are taught the basics of fundamental subjects - i.e. maths, their native language, history, geography, science etc. -, I also believe that they should be left free to pursue their inclinations as soon as they approach high school. During adolescence, youngsters start to develop their interests and curiosities and completely checking the opportunity to follow them could result in a dispassion for study. For example, I myself had the chance to choose which subjects I would have studied more thoroughly and I am grateful for having had this opportunity: I preferred humanities to hard sciences and I would not have succeeded in school the way I did if I was impeded to pursue what I really cherished.

Moreover, we should remember that not all students want to attend university: what about those who would like to go working or pursuing a career which does not require a degree? Forcing everyone to undertake the same curriculum could seriously damage the chances to emerge for those who are not prone to academia, but who perhaps have other hidden talents. I am thinking about future musicians and chefs for instance, who will probably not need to enroll in a university course. Therefore, to let everybody "shine" thanks to his or her own qualities, the education system should be flexible, allowing students to express their full potential even before attending college.

Given that this is my main point, I am also aware of the fact that students are not fully conscious and mature in high school in order to shape autonomously their own curriculum. In fact, a complete laissez-faire could result in pointless efforts toward subjects and topics which will not be useful in college or otherwise in life. This is the reason why I also believe that institutions and teachers have a responsibility in organizing curricula and educational paths: the main objective is to give the students the instruments and knowledge they will likely need to pursue their life goals and ambitions. And this knowledge could vary from time to time, from person to person. This leads to a necessary differentiation of curricula, "cum grano salis", or in other words with the experienced guidance of adults and the support of institutions, the ones who know what a student could need to succeed in life.

To conclude, I feel that letting young generations express themselves during their school years before college is vital to enhance their curiosity towards the world. To do this, a mandatory curriculum analogous for everyone cannot be a viable solution, because it would hamper the disclosure of more unconventional qualities, which could not fit in a strictly academic-oriented syllabus. Analogously, it should be allowed to those who have a great academic potential to receive an adequate - and maybe advanced - preparation. The point should always be that institutions make the greatest effort in order to make young generations thrive towards their passions and abilities.